be suffering for those works that others receive much good by! What a sad case is it, that historians, lawyers, physicians, philosophers, linguists, and the professors of all the sciences, should undo themselves for ever by those excellent works that edify the world! Nay, what can be more lamentable to think of, than that able and learned divines themselves should lose their own souls in the studying, and preaching those precious truths, that are saving unto others; and that such excellent writings as remain a standing blessing to the church, should be the authors of mortal sin! And yet so it is, if the renown and immortality of a name on earth be the end that all this work is done for.

12. Lastly, Consider that if honour be good for you, it is better attained by minding your duty for the honour of God, and denying your own honour, than by seeking it; for honour is the shadow that will follow you if you fly from it, and fly from you if you follow it. What Christ here saith of life, is true of honour: he that seeketh and saveth it shall lose it, and he that loseth it for Christ shall find it. The greatest honour is to deny ourselves, and our own honour, and to do most for the honour of God; and to be contented to be nothing, that God may be all. For you have his promise, that them that honour him he will honour, but they that dispise him shall be lightly esteemed.

Though I have endeavoured by a right limitation and exposition of the foregoing parts of self-denial, to prevent mistakes, and give you those grounds by which objections may be answered, yet the stir that is made in the world about this point, by Papists and many other mistaking sects, doth persuade me to give a more distinct resolution of some of the principal doubts that are before us, and therein to shew you that self-denial consisteth not in all things that by some are pretended to be parts of it; but that there is a great deal of sin that under the name of goes

self-denial among many of these sorts of mistaken persons.

CHAPTER LI.

Whether Self-denial lie in renouncing Propriety?

Quest. 1. 'WHETHER doth self-denial require us to renounce propriety, and to know nothing as our own' as the monks among the Papists swear to do, as part of their state of perfection; and a book called, "The Way to the Sabbath of Rest," doth teach us?

J

Answ. 1. That there shall be no propriety in goods, or estate among men, is contrary to the will of God, who hath made men his stewards, and trusted several persons with several talents, and fo hidden stealing, and commanded men to labour that they may have to give to him that needeth; and he that hath this world's goods and seeth his brother have need, must not shut up the bowels of his compassion. It is a standing duty to give to the poor; and we shall therefore have the poor always with us for this exercise of our charity. And he that hath nothing, can give nothing, nor use it for God. Why did Paul require them to give to the distressed saints, and maintain the ministry, and gather for such uses every first day of the week, if he would have men have nothing to give? This therefore is a conceit which needs nothing but reason, and the reading and belief of Scripture to confute it.

2. But as no man is a proprietary, or hath any thing of his own, in the strict and absolute sense, because all is God's, and we are but stewards; so no man may retain his human analogical propriety, when God calleth him to give it up. No man may retain any thing from God's use and service which he hath a propriety in. We have so much propriety as that no man must rob us; and so much as our works of charity are rewardable, though it be but giving a cup of cold water, which could not be without propriety; for who will reward him that gives that which is none of his own? yea, it is made the matter of the last judgment; “I was hungry, and ye fed me; I was naked, and ye clothed me," &c. Which they could not have done if they had not had food and clothing to bestow. So that the denial of propriety would destroy all exercise of charity in such

kinds, and destroy all societies and orderly converse and industry in the world.

But yet when God calls for any thing from us, we must presently obey, and quit all title to it, and resign it freely and gladly to his will.

And 3. There must be so much vigour of charity, and sense of our neighbour's wants, as that no man must shut up the bowels of compassion; but as we must love our neighbours as ourselves, so must we relieve them as a second self; yea, and before ourselves, if God's service or honour should require it. If we must lay down our lives for the brethren, much more our estates. So that levelling community' is abominable; but 'charitable community' is a Christian duty, and the great character of sincere love to Christ in his members. And therfore in the primitive church there was no forbidding of propriety; but there was, 1. A resignation of all to God, to signify that they were contented to forsake all for him, and did prefer Christ and the kingdom of God before all. And 2. There was so great vigour of true charity, as that all men voluntarily supplied the wants of the church and poor, and voluntarily made all things as common, that is, common by voluntary communication for use, though not common in primary title; and so no man took any thing as his own, when God, and his churches, and his brethren's wants did call for it. O that we had more of that Christian love that should cause a 'charitable community,' which is the true mean between the monkish community,' and the selfish tenacious propriety! Levelling hath not destroyed one soul for ten thousand that an inordinate love of propriety hath destroyed.

CHAPTER LII.

Whether it lie in renouncing Marriage?

Quest. 2. WHETHER self-denial consist in the forswearing or renouncing of marriage, or the natural use of it by those that are married?'

Answ. To forbid marriage simply, is called by the Holy Ghost "a doctrine of devils" 1 Tim. iv. 1. 3. and was one

of the heresies that the apostles were called out to encoun ter in their own days. But yet a married state doth ordinarily (not always) call men off from that free attendance on the service of God without distraction which is very desirable; and therefore those that are capable of doing God any notable service, which marriage is like to hinder them from, should avoid it, if they can, without a greater evil. And therefore the church did think it for many ages, so fit for ministers to be single, that they might have the less of worldly affairs and cares to call them off from the work of God, and their carnal relations might not hinder them from more public duties or charitable works. The Papists, therefore, mistakingly take the vow of chastity to be an entering into a state of perfection, and sinfully condemn the marriage of priests; when the apostle expressly saith, "A bishop must be blameless, the husband of one wife having his children in subjection;" 1 Tim. iii. 24. And so of deacons, verse 12. And others run into the other extreme. But the true meaning is this: 1. Ordinarily marriage is more distracting and hindering to us in the service of God, than a single life; especially to ministers, and such as should wholly addict themselves to the public service of the church. 2. But yet all men are not alike obliged to it or from it. Some may be necessitated to it by the temper of their bodies to avoid a greater evil, even sin itself: and some may have no such necessity. Some may have their worldly estate and affairs in such a plight, that they can far better manage them with freedom for God's service in a married than a single state; but with others it is not so; and especially with very few ministers. So that a single or married life is in itself indifferent; but as a means to God's service, that is a duty to one that is a sin to another; but because that a single life is more commonly free and fittest for this great end, therefore the apostle preferreth it as better, because more suitable to the state of the most (at least in those times), though to some, marriage may be a duty. So that every one should impartially inquire, in which state they may do God the greatest service, and that they should choose, not on popish ground, as if it were commended to that particular person to whom it is not commanded, and were an evangelical counsel of perfection, and to be vowed; but in a prudent ordering of our

lives, applying the general rules of Scripture to our several estates. And thus according to the command of Christ, He that can receive this saying, let him."

66

CHAPTER LIII.

Or in Solitude and renouncing secular Affairs?

Quest. 3. WHETHER self-denial consist in solitude, and avoiding secular affairs, as trades, merchandise, labour, &c.?"

:

Answ. 1. It is the standing rule of the apostle, of all that are able, "That if any man will not work, neither should he eat;" 2 Thess. iii. 10.: and he calls those "disorderly walkers, that work not at all;" 2 Thess. iii. 11. and requireth us to have "no company with such," commanding men, with "quietness to work, and eat their own bread;" verse 12. 14. But yet there are several sorts of labour: some labour with the body, which is usually more private, as to the extent (if not to the intent) of the benefit; and some labour with the mind, which is usually more for public good; as princes, judges, magistrates of all sorts, lawyers, physicians, ministers, &c. Now men are to consider whether by the labour of the mind or of the body they are like to be more serviceable to God, and which they are fittest for, and called to; and that they ought to set themselves to, and that in true self-denial, and for God. To be idle, is so far from being a part of self-denial, that it is a sinful part of fleshpleasing. And so is it to choose any calling or employment principally for fleshly ease or accommodation. The apostles were some fishermen, and some of other callings, and none of them renounced worldly labour, or affairs, save only so far as they hindered them from the work of God, to which they (and all ministers) were wholly to addict themselves, as appears, 1 Tim. iv. 15. 2 Tim. ii. 4. To do therefore as many monks do, to be employed in no calling for the public good, under pretence of being religious to themselves, is to be burdens to the earth, and gross violators of the laws of God.